Gays can't marry in Cali or whatever.

[Death Aflame]

Most polygamist wives tend to be soulless, braindead, manipulated sacks of flesh with no will of their own, so I would imagine that divorce is not very high among polygamist groups.

The media's portrayal of them certainly seems to corroborate this, though I don't know how true this representation actually is.

 

[cookiecutter]

Where in the Constitution do you derive the right for gay people to marry? I'd really like to know this.

As Dodens pointed out, it is in the US constitution that you can't deny people rights and I'm sure it's in the California constitution.

Not that I believe in the following, but wouldn't it follow from your logic that other 'sexual minorities' such as incestuous couples (of consenting ages) could also seek the same freedoms/protections as gays, lesbians etc.?

I only ask because I have heard it brought up before as a sort of pseudo-defence for maintaining the heterosexual norm. Personally, I don't like the argument, but it seems to be supported logically, does it not (since it too is based on 'consenting' adults unlike other sexual 'identities' such as pedophilia)?

I don't really have an airtight argument against this right now, but incest and polygamy are often harmful relationships where one side is abused and coerced, and "consent" may not really be the same thing as two dudes being in love. Also, being gay is a personality trait, whereas being incestuous or being polygamous are definitely lifestyle choices.

 

[AchrisK]

Alright! Everyone go read this article I posted, and begin discussing it, or bring things from it into this conversation. It's is very interesting and relevant.

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/gmd-social-forum/442364-what-makes-people-vote-republican-jonathan-haidt.html

 

[AchrisK]

Most polygamist wives tend to be soulless, braindead, manipulated sacks of flesh with no will of their own, so I would imagine that divorce is not very high among polygamist groups.

You don't know this at all. How many have you met? You're judging a culture you don't understand.

 

[skeptik]

I'm judging based on studies that have been done of such cultures and also how these women presented themselves when they were trying to justify not having their children taken away earlier this year. The presented a video of themselves and their life of the compound, completely of their own accord, in order to show who they really are, so I think that's pretty good evidence.

 

[Burning In Hell]

That's probably true for the most part. Those cultures don't respect women the way others do. Women are generally at the bottom of the food chain.

 

[Death Aflame]

As Dodens pointed out, it is in the US constitution that you can't deny people rights and I'm sure it's in the California constitution.

I don't really have an airtight argument against this right now, but incest and polygamy are often harmful relationships where one side is abused and coerced, and "consent" may not really be the same thing as two dudes being in love. Also, being gay is a personality trait, whereas being incestuous or being polygamous are definitely lifestyle choices.

I am willing to bet that the number of abusive heterosexual relationships trump all others, so I don't see how that argument holds much water since it risks running into the generalizing territory that used to characterize America's perception of 'gay' people as rapists as well.

Regarding your later point, that is debatable, as far as I know most gay men claim that it is part of their personality whereas Lesbians regard their sexual orientation as a choice more than anything. Though I am not an expert in this field, so I could be mistaken.

 

[Death Aflame]

That's probably true for the most part. Those cultures don't respect women the way others do. Women are generally at the bottom of the food chain.

While this could certainly be true, I think we should be careful when attempting to generalize our values onto another, largely unfamiliar culture.

 

[skeptik]

Enough of this relativity bullshit. If you can't see the difference in rights between gay marriage, incestuous marriage, and polygamous marriage, then you shouldn't be having this discussion. Hint: Only banning gay marriage completely wipes out a person's opportunity to marry at all.

 

[Burning In Hell]

While this could certainly be true, I think we should be careful when attempting to generalize our values onto another, largely unfamiliar culture.

Careful why? True we may not know enough about a culture to be 100% accurate. But we see what goes on in other cultures around us to get a fairly decent idea I would think.

 

[Burning In Hell]

Gay marriage and Polygamus marriage are no problem. Incestual I do have a problem with. This can produce physically and mentally handicapped children.

 

[Dak]

Gay marriage and Polygamus marriage are no problem. Incestual I do have a problem with. This can produce physically and mentally handicapped children.

Interestingly enough, the Bible doesn't forbid polygamy. In fact, there are rules for it in the Old Testament. It's funny to watch [fundamentalists] start to sputter when that gets brought up.

 

[AchrisK]

Hey, I ain't sputterin!!!

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Polygamy has some creepy real-life implications sometimes, such as that breeding farm in Texas...*shudder*

 

[Orion Crystal Ice]

Interestingly enough, the Bible doesn't forbid polygamy. In fact, there are rules for it in the Old Testament. It's funny to watch [fundamentalists] start to sputter when that gets brought up.

Nothing presented in the Gospels or anywhere else makes reference to 'The Bible' in the form it's in as the 'source' of anything and thus it can't be used to discredit itself in that context. Speaking of the Gospels, 'fundamentalists' adhere by them (or should) - the words and teachings of Jesus, and not the lawbooks of the Torah that make up the Old Testament and the old covenant.

I know it won't make a difference as to what you need to think, but carry on.

 

[Dak]

You're making a poorly worded reference to the doctrine of Dispensationalism, which imo is a way for evangelicals to claim "We believe the whole Bible!" and then pick out whatever they want to use.

 

[Orion Crystal Ice]

I know what it is. It was your own reference, you said "in the Bible". I'm saying that's illogical whether or not people do it en masse. I'm aware they pick and choose. I'm saying it doesn't matter objectively or anywhere outside their own bubble of the-Bible-is-this-or-that...there's only 4 gospels at the end of the day.

 

[Dak]

I hold the Torah and gospels in equal regard. However, I recognize that being in a secular nation/world, some of my beliefs have to merely stay doctrine as opposed to action given the make-up of the 21st century Western society.

 

[Orion Crystal Ice]

I am not sure where the discussion would/could/should progress from here. Only starting on page 19 here have things started to branch out in terms of making comparisons to other forms of 'marriage' in order to help find some form of objective viewpoint, however fuzzy it may be...but eventually this WILL also be whittled down to the simple boiling point of law vs personal morality and interpretations of both. But you have to have some backbone of truth to really truly believe something logically, and you have to really truly believe something to make any change with it or be an example in that belief, so any progression in thought with anyone as a result of this discussion is a success at least.

 

[Dak]

Probably no hope of that.